Quit being such a fucking cry baby. I gave you a perfectly reasonable answer to your criticism, like I gave nobodies who you're parroting. If you come here acting all "yeah you're this huge asshole, see, but if you just do what I say then maybe you can redeem yourself, hur hur" then don't expect me to be all nicey-nicey to you.

Like anyone who actually bothers to read this thread can see, I've taken plenty of feedback and implemented plenty of changes that have been suggested by others, just like in any other map thread. I don't agree with every suggestion, but if I don't, I respond and give a reason for it. If that's too much to handle for your sensitive feelings, I'm sorry, I don't know how the f*ck I could sugar-coat it any more than I already do.

DiM wrote:so you have a map of eurasia that does not include the whole europe or the whole asia but funny enough it includes part of africa.then you split this whole area into territories named after countries cities or generic regions while drawing many imaginary borders.and speaking of the imaginary, you decided to add some fantasy mountains in various locations.

don't bother responding i know what your answer will be even though i can't see your posts

Oh yeah, and this is the kind of "constructive feedback" I'm supposed to give reasonable answers to? Right..........

Quit being such a fucking cry baby. I gave you a perfectly reasonable answer to your criticism, like I gave nobodies who you're parroting. If you come here acting all "yeah you're this huge asshole, see, but if you just do what I say then maybe you can redeem yourself, hur hur" then don't expect me to be all nicey-nicey to you.

Like anyone who actually bothers to read this thread can see, I've taken plenty of feedback and implemented plenty of changes that have been suggested by others, just like in any other map thread. I don't agree with every suggestion, but if I don't, I respond and give a reason for it. If that's too much to handle for your sensitive feelings, I'm sorry, I don't know how the f*ck I could sugar-coat it any more than I already do.

DiM wrote:so you have a map of eurasia that does not include the whole europe or the whole asia but funny enough it includes part of africa.then you split this whole area into territories named after countries cities or generic regions while drawing many imaginary borders.and speaking of the imaginary, you decided to add some fantasy mountains in various locations.

don't bother responding i know what your answer will be even though i can't see your posts

Oh yeah, and this is the kind of "constructive feedback" I'm supposed to give reasonable answers to? Right..........

My feelings aren't hurt at all. I couldn't give a shit less. I was just trying to help you out, let you know how you come off to people, as is evidenced by people's reactions toward you (see this thread, and others). But whatever guy, I don't know why I even tried. Anyway, as you said, this isn't the place for this. So, good day, sir.

So, anyway. I decided to change the bonus name of "Oceania" to "East Indies", which is more accurate. I don't like it totally, as it's too similar to East India, and they may get mixed up somehow, but it's the only name for the region that isn't hugely long (like Indonesian Archipelago, Maritime South-East Asia, etc...)

Victor Sullivan wrote:Also, I think it would do well to have a connection between UAE and East Iran or Oman and East Iran (UAE--East Iran being my personal preference, given their closeness in comparison).

Sullivan, I'm still waiting to hear why you think this should be done. I don't necessarily disagree, it's just I can't figure out the reason you're asking for this...

Victor Sullivan wrote:Also, I think it would do well to have a connection between UAE and East Iran or Oman and East Iran (UAE--East Iran being my personal preference, given their closeness in comparison).

Sullivan, I'm still waiting to hear why you think this should be done. I don't necessarily disagree, it's just I can't figure out the reason you're asking for this...

Mostly because it bothers me that I can't attack when I'm 2 mm away from a country Gameplay-wise, you can just bump up Arabia to 4 with the added border, and Middle East is largely unaffected.

Victor Sullivan wrote:Also, I think it would do well to have a connection between UAE and East Iran or Oman and East Iran (UAE--East Iran being my personal preference, given their closeness in comparison).

Sullivan, I'm still waiting to hear why you think this should be done. I don't necessarily disagree, it's just I can't figure out the reason you're asking for this...

Mostly because it bothers me that I can't attack when I'm 2 mm away from a country Gameplay-wise, you can just bump up Arabia to 4 with the added border, and Middle East is largely unaffected.

Crap, I was kinda hoping there'd be a gameplay reason for the suggestion... by your logic I couldn't have any impassables at all

I'm always kind of hesitant to add sea routes over bodies of water when they aren't absolutely needed... it always kind of seems like a waste of an impassable... but I can kind of see where you're coming from, too.

Anyway, I kinda feel like a route to Pakistan would be more functional... a route between India/Arabia was suggested before, I didn't do it then because I didn't think there'd be room for one due to the legend, but now it looks like I could fit one in... how would you feel about an Oman - Pakistan connection?

The UAE lays claim to some island on the south coast of Iran, which is why they backed Saddam in the Iraq-Iran War... so maybe the Arabian peninsula connection could be UAE to East Iran. And the other is about the possibility of adding in Okinawa, which is technically part of Japan proper.

However I can see why you might not go out of your way to add these footnotes into the map, but perhaps next time you're drawing in an update you might feel inclined to do such.

I'm aware of Okinawa, however I don't think there's a gameplay reason to include it at this point... Seeing as Far East is the only bonus not part of a superbonus, I think it's proper to keep it as a small, easy bonus.

We also already discussed adding a connection between UAE/Iran and it was decided to add it to Pakistan instead, I think that connection is much more useful in a gameplay perspective.

You know, there's just so many small geography details that could be included in a map this size, so I've from the start decided to work under the principle "gameplay over geography". So when considering whether to include some geographical detail, I'll consider how it affects the gameplay first. I mean, I could stuff the map full of small states and authonomic regions (Åland, Bhutan, Transnistria just to name a few I've had to cut out) but at some point there'd still be a limit to how much I could add while keeping the map readable.

If there's any territories to add, I'd prefer most to add them to the India/China areas. The west side of the map already has a slightly higher concentration of territories, Russia is already large enough, and I don't like the idea of making Far East or S.E. Asia any larger. So those are what's left...

How about the Andamans? The very small island between India & Indochina? I could add it as part of West India, or maybe East... the only problem is it's small size, it can make it hard to see which bonus it belongs to.

Anybody see Java Island on the map? No!I can accept you can not put Java into the map in parts of Asia as well as Iceland in Europe (you have reasons, and I don't care). But give the name of the Sumatran island into "Sumatra & Java" can not be accepted by most people of Sumatra.

Without any other areas that become parts of Indonesia, Sumatra and Java are not possible together. They don't like each others

So I plead with you, change its name again to Sumatra. If you insist include Java, because it is part of Eurasia, why do you not replace Ireland with "Ireland & Iceland"? Ty

One more thing. Sulawesi is a meeting of two plates of Asia and Australia. We can say some regions in Sulawesi belong to Asian Plate and some regions (the Southeast) belong to Australian plate. This causes the unique flora and fauna of Sulawesi, which are different from other areas in the western and eastern parts of Indonesia.

To avoid this issue and on the other hand to keep the Gameplay the same, I propose to remove Sulawesi and split Philippines into 2 regions : Luzon and Mindanao. And I think it will look better on your map

As for Sulawesi, it's considered to be a part of Asia by most definitions of Asia. It belongs to the group of Maritime Southeast Asia, also known as Indonesian Archipelago, or East Indies. This group is included in the definition of Asia. Therefore I don't see any problem including Sulawesi on the map.

Ireland and Iceland are totally different countries, so the comparison is invalid. Sumatra and Java are both part of Indonesia.

There have been so many people complaining (at least two) that they cannot see the Java island on the map, that a compromise was made to include it nominally to Sumatra. However, if you can think of a better name for the region that is representative of the western islands of Indonesia, I can change it to that.

oh dude... I've been on vacation and this is the first time I've looked back into the foundry since I got back. Then I see this. Then I say, Nice!

My only suggestion at this point would be to split Beijing into 2 territories. Beijing and Nei Mongol/near Mongolia. Maybe give Nei Mongol to the west China bonus and change their names to Inner China and Outer China.

The Bison King wrote:oh dude... I've been on vacation and this is the first time I've looked back into the foundry since I got back. Then I see this. Then I say, Nice!

Thanks! It's so nice to hear so much good feedback for this map.

My only suggestion at this point would be to split Beijing into 2 territories. Beijing and Nei Mongol/near Mongolia. Maybe give Nei Mongol to the west China bonus and change their names to Inner China and Outer China.

I like the idea, except that the current border between West/East Chinas follows the official divisions:

So on that point of view it'd make more sense to keep the territory on the East side. (Plus it's a much larger pain to change the bonus divisions than to change the territory borders, but that of course has nothing to do with my opinion... )

On the other hand, from a gameplay perspective it'd make more sense to add it to the west, to keep the East a more feasible bonus... and I just said all this fancy stuff about how gameplay comes first, didn't I...

So I'm a bit stumped. You know, considering the gameplay again, I'd much rather add a territory to West India, maybe split Central India or Madras... from a pure gameplay perspective, that's the one area that could use an additional territory, I think... I'm not saying adding one in China is a totally bad idea, I could live with that, but India would be more preferable, you know?

And since we're on the subject of China, I wonder if there'd be a better name for the superbonus - seeing as how it includes Mongolia and all.

In regards to renaming the superbonus of China, I know that 'East Asia' has traditionally been Mongolia, China (and Taiwan), Japan, and Korea. Since you have 'Far East' being Korea and Japan, you could still make the superbonus 'East Asia' I think.

Doing this would also probably allow you to put Far East into a superbonus, instead of awkwardly standing alone.

AndyDufresne wrote:In regards to renaming the superbonus of China, I know that 'East Asia' has traditionally been Mongolia, China (and Taiwan), Japan, and Korea. Since you have 'Far East' being Korea and Japan, you could still make the superbonus 'East Asia' I think.

Doing this would also probably allow you to put Far East into a superbonus, instead of awkwardly standing alone.

Well, it would be nice... but isn't there any alternative name to "East Asia"? I already have several bonus & superbonus names with cardinal directions in them, and I kinda wouldn't like to overdo it, you know?

Then there's one other consideration... and maybe I'm being a bit silly here, but... aesthetically, I kind of like having that yellow Far East there, the colour looks really good there, providing a good contrast to the purple hues of China... if I were to merge it in the same superbonus I'd have to make it follow the colour scheme of China.

AndyDufresne wrote:In regards to renaming the superbonus of China, I know that 'East Asia' has traditionally been Mongolia, China (and Taiwan), Japan, and Korea. Since you have 'Far East' being Korea and Japan, you could still make the superbonus 'East Asia' I think.

Doing this would also probably allow you to put Far East into a superbonus, instead of awkwardly standing alone.

Well, it would be nice... but isn't there any alternative name to "East Asia"? I already have several bonus & superbonus names with cardinal directions in them, and I kinda wouldn't like to overdo it, you know?

Then there's one other consideration... and maybe I'm being a bit silly here, but... aesthetically, I kind of like having that yellow Far East there, the colour looks really good there, providing a good contrast to the purple hues of China... if I were to merge it in the same superbonus I'd have to make it follow the colour scheme of China.

Yeah, I like the color scheme too.

East Asia is a pretty traditional and standard name. There might be a historical name that could fit, like Cathay or something, but I don't think that would be very accurate either.